COLONIAL MISGOVERNMENT. [From the "Britannia," September 20]

New Zealander, Volume 8, Issue 605, 31 January 1852, Page 3

COLONIAL MISGOVERNMENT. [From the "Britannia," September 20]

The Times of Tuesday last speaks out very warmly on the subject ol' Colonial governments. It is difficult to imagine anything more monstrous than the present system o"f centralisation which makes the Colonial minister for the time being

supreme ruler — despot in fact — of two-thirds of the British empire. It is a system ruinous to the prospects of the Colonies themselves, and subversive of the civil rights of evei-y British subject whom birth or enterprise constitutes a colonist. Ifc is one of the fundamental principles of our I Constitution, one for which our ancestors have fought and bled, one which we value almost beyond any other, that the subject shall not be taxed without his own consent given through his representative in Parliament. This great principle is utterly set at naught so far as the Colonies are concerned which groan under the leaden sceptre of Powning-street. It is true that the Colonists are exempted from payment of the taxes levied in the mother country, but they are subjected to many burdens (sometimes heavy enough in comparison with their slender means) in their adopted land ; and these burdens are imposed on them by the nominees of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies alone. Why is this ? On what ground, moral or political, should such an abuse exist ? It was not thus that Rome treated her Colonies, or the Roman Empire would never have attained its unrivalled power and extent. But it is not simply unjust, this infraction of political rights, it^ is unwise also. It tends to alienate the affections of the Colonists from the parent state. Can it be expected that men deprived of the dearest rights of citizenship, will feel aught but dislike and distrust for the hands that rob them of those rights ? Can we doubt that they will look forward, with ardent and longing expectation to the day when might shall enable them to demand and assert them — when their cry shall be " equality of citizenship or separation !" Do we requiie Australia or Canada to follow the example of the United States ere we recognise this as the inevitable consummation of our present folly and obstinacy ! The apologists of our present system of Colonial Government are apt to tell us that such or such a colony is as yet t: unfit" for a representative assembly. "Why so ? They know little of the Colonies, or of the people who inhabit them, who are ignorant of the [fact that the masses in those dependencies are of a far higher class in point of education and intelligence than those of the mother country. And naturally so : for it is the man of enterprise and intelligence, and not the dullard and the sloth, who leaves his native land to pursue his fortunes in other climes; and even if he be poor he is not condemned to a life of unremitting and unrewarding toil in his chosen land, so that he can still find the time and the means to educate his children as they grow up around him. In the Colony whose unhappy state originated the remarks of the Times, the general intelligence of the people is of a very high order. There are excellent free schools in every town and village frequented by the children of all classes, so that ignorance is as rare there as poverty. But even were it otherwise the fault would rest with England ; her sons go forth admittedly fit to exercise the rights of citizens ; if then they or their posterity become unfit, it must be through neglect—thnwgh their forced disability for generations to exercise such privileges. Nations have attained to greatness even under a despotic government ; but then it has been through the splendid qualities of some individual despot. England was great, powerful, and flourishing under Cromwell : France, in a less degree, under Napoleon. But what can Australia or the Cape hope to be under Lord Grey ? Nay, we are disposed to believe that nations arbitrarily governed more surely sink into littleness and insignificance, weakness and wretchedness, under feeble rule, than they rise to glory under the guidance of a hero or a statesman. To what state of degradation, then, may we not expect to see our Colonies arrive under the present system of Colonial misrule — more especially with a Whigministry — and most especially with Lord Grey in Downing-strcct ? This wise individual, whose only notion of the method of arranging a difficulty appears to bo by getting into a passion with it, finding that the Colonists objected to a Constitution to be settled by a majority of Government j nominees in the Legislative Council, has now determined to try to carry out his own scheme with the whole council nominated by the governor. In this attempt we seem to recognise a desire for revenge, after the defeat his notable convict scheme i met with at the hands of the Cape Colonists. We are much mistaken if the same people will not foil him again as effectually as before. And ! meantime we only hope that his continued escapades will open the eyes of Parliament to the necessity of a new Colonial minister, and eventu- \ ally to a new system of Colonial rule altogether.